Z-clipped:common sense is an oxymoron: When there is no way (at least from our current perspective) to settle the question one way or the other, how is the statement "There is NO god" based on anything other than faith?

common sense is an oxymoron:True. But then, what is atheism? I may be splitting hairs here, but to me being "adamant that there is no god" is what separates atheism from hard agnosticism.

There is no separation between atheism and agnosticism, nor does there need to be. Almost all atheists are agnostic, because agnosticism is an epistemological position and has nothing to do with whether gods exist or not. It is not a "third opstion" between atheism and theism. It does not mean you are "undecided",

You really need to study up on your logic if you're going to try to wield it in discussions like this.

common sense is an oxymoron:When the very definition of "god" is open to interpretation, disproof becomes far more difficult, perhaps even impossible.

This position is known as Ignosticism.

common sense is an oxymoron:For the record, I don't believe that the existence of God(s) CAN be proven; and furthermore, given the fact that there seem to be about as many definitions of "god" as there are believers, I find it pointless to believe in one particular definition over any of the others.

Congratulations. You're an agnostic atheist.

common sense is an oxymoron:When there is no evidence to support either side of the argument, any assertion on either side is ultimately based on faith.

Oh please. Like no religion has ever paid for and put up advertising that insults people of other faiths. They just don't like it when the same game gets played against them instead of to their advantage.

s2s2s2:Z-clipped: common sense is an oxymoron: When there is no way (at least from our current perspective) to settle the question one way or the other, how is the statement "There is NO god" based on anything other than faith?

Onus Probandi.

...would apply to anyone making a claim, one way or the other.

It applies to the positive claim, "God exists". Atheists generally do not claim that all gods do not exist. Only that because the positive claim lacks any evidence, it can be easily dismissed. When an atheist says "there is no god", it should be read as "for all intents, the likelihood that there is a god is negligible". In other words, if there were no positive claim being made on the part of the theist, there would be no argument.

Modern philosophers generally agree on what atheism is, as do most of the atheists on Fark. It's generally only the theists and the "devil's advocates", like yourself, who try to portray atheism as something other than it is.

There are many flavors of atheism, but the common defining characteristic is simply a lack of belief in gods. If you start from there, you won't have as many problems understanding the position.

Do you preface every affirmative statement about the world with "Assuming that I exist, and that there is no Evil Genius tricking me into believing in reality..."?

Are you OK with people making the claim that "Santa Claus isn't real" without an epistemological disclaimer first? Because atheists dismiss gods using precisely the same logic that most adults use to dismiss Santa. The ONLY difference between the argument for Santa and the argument for god is the degree of Wishful Thinking involved.

For example, in Washington Irving's History of New York (1809), Sinterklaas was Americanized into "Santa Claus" (a name first used in the American press in 1773)[21] but lost his bishop's apparel, and was at first pictured as a thick-bellied Dutch sailor with a pipe in a green winter coat. Irving's book was a lampoon of the Dutch culture of New York, and much of this portrait is his joking invention.

I think it's something like "I refuse to recognize that atheists might have a legitimate reason to be annoyed at the Christians in this country, so their reasons for taking jabs at religion must not have any purpose but to be purely childish and contrarian."

It was a stupid question to begin with. On one hand, you have a few little atheist groups here and there taking out potshot ads that occasionally cross the line into trollish and counterproductive. On the other hand, you have US Congressmen and Senators speaking out in the media using religious dogma to deny American people their basic civil rights. This ad is like shooting a Sherman tank with a BB gun, but you know... there's nothing religious people like better than imagining themselves to be David when they're really Goliath.

s2s2s2:That is also why the thread more rapidly becomes about who is correct, rather than an admonishment of who is being a dick in a given situation.

I agree that atheists should keep their message positive because that will ultimately help their cause the most, but if conservatives are looking for blanket condemnation of borderline tasteless ads like the the one in TFA, they've got a long wait for a train that isn't coming. Especially considering the number of farkers with big broad brushes painting away in the first 20 or so posts of the thread.

s2s2s2:FloydA: Can someone translate this from Derp to English for me?

It is easier to (atheistically)troll in white, christian USA, than it would be to do the same in Saudi Arabia.

If the government in the US operated the way southern white evangelicals want it to, atheists who spoke out here would have just as much reason to fear for their lives as the atheists in Muslim dominated countries do.

The My Little Pony Killer:Oh please. Like no religion has ever paid for and put up advertising that insults people of other faiths. They just don't like it when the same game gets played against them instead of to their advantage.

Z-clipped:s2s2s2: FloydA: Can someone translate this from Derp to English for me?

It is easier to (atheistically)troll in white, christian USA, than it would be to do the same in Saudi Arabia.

If the government in the US operated the way southern white evangelicals want it to, atheists who spoke out here would have just as much reason to fear for their lives as the atheists in Muslim dominated countries do.

I tend to think the only people that have a real reason to gripe about the signs, are the atheists than don't want to be as dickly as alleged Christians.

Also, my iPad autocorrects Christianity to be capitalized, but does not do the same for atheism.

Z-clipped:s2s2s2: FloydA: Can someone translate this from Derp to English for me?

It is easier to (atheistically)troll in white, christian USA, than it would be to do the same in Saudi Arabia.

If the government in the US operated the way southern white evangelicals want it to, atheists who spoke out here would have just as much reason to fear for their lives as the atheists in Muslim dominated countries do.

That bar is really low there.

Atheists do face a shiat ton of discrimination in heavily christian areas. It has been studied extensively. Some of the stories are very sad.

s2s2s2:And also far less necessary. Atheists are winning in the courts. The trolls are happening as a result of those victories, not in hopes of. It is the atheistic equivalent of evangelistic trolling.

That is also why the thread more rapidly becomes about who is correct, rather than an admonishment of who is being a dick in a given situation.

Well, while it's technically being a dick, the underdog being a bit of a dick in a relatively light-hearted fashion in an era where there is like one atheist in national government total is kind of hard to treat as a crime against humanity, it's just mild sarcastic subversiveness.

And it's in response to the continual religious displays on public property every other damned week, including outright permanent ones at courthouses, so the religious people not only started it, they're much bigger offenders.

100 Watt Walrus:The My Little Pony Killer: Oh please. Like no religion has ever paid for and put up advertising that insults people of other faiths. They just don't like it when the same game gets played against them instead of to their advantage.

/not gonna walk on eggshells around your delusion

Other people do it, so being an asshole is OK!

In the real world....

"Hey, I think if I throw this hammer up in the air over and over again, it might hit a cloud and cause it to rain!"

"That's stupid."

----

"Hey, if I talk to myself and pretend it's a guy who got killed a couple of thousand years ago and ask him nicely, he'll let me live forever in the clouds!"

"That's stupid"

"Don't disrespect my faith! It's my faith, and now you're bad because you're disrespecting my faith! It's my *faith* and all, you know! Do you know what faith is? It's *faith*, and you have to respect it!...."

Jim_Callahan:s2s2s2: And also far less necessary. Atheists are winning in the courts. The trolls are happening as a result of those victories, not in hopes of. It is the atheistic equivalent of evangelistic trolling.

That is also why the thread more rapidly becomes about who is correct, rather than an admonishment of who is being a dick in a given situation.

Well, while it's technically being a dick, the underdog being a bit of a dick in a relatively light-hearted fashion in an era where there is like one atheist in national government total is kind of hard to treat as a crime against humanity, it's just mild sarcastic subversiveness.

And it's in response to the continual religious displays on public property every other damned week, including outright permanent ones at courthouses, so the religious people not only started it, they're much bigger offenders.

Z-clipped:[stupid troll's name redacted]: FloydA: Can someone translate this from Derp to English for me?

It is easier to (atheistically)troll in white, christian USA, than it would be to do the same in Saudi Arabia.

If the government in the US operated the way southern white evangelicals want it to, atheists who spoke out here would have just as much reason to fear for their lives as the atheists in Muslim dominated countries do.

FloydA:Z-clipped: [stupid troll's name redacted]: FloydA: Can someone translate this from Derp to English for me?

It is easier to (atheistically)troll in white, christian USA, than it would be to do the same in Saudi Arabia.

If the government in the US operated the way southern white evangelicals want it to, atheists who spoke out here would have just as much reason to fear for their lives as the atheists in Muslim dominated countries do.

Seems as though the god-botherers can't even keep their story straight. Salon whining about atheists being Islamophobes.

nocturnal001:FloydA: Z-clipped: [stupid troll's name redacted]: FloydA: Can someone translate this from Derp to English for me?

It is easier to (atheistically)troll in white, christian USA, than it would be to do the same in Saudi Arabia.

If the government in the US operated the way southern white evangelicals want it to, atheists who spoke out here would have just as much reason to fear for their lives as the atheists in Muslim dominated countries do.

Seems as though the god-botherers can't even keep their story straight. Salon whining about atheists being Islamophobes.

I don't understand your point.

Some Christians (like the troll whose name I snipped above) claim that the mean old atheists are unfairly "picking on" them and claim that atheists are too scared to say anything bad about Muslims, when in fact Hitchens, Dawkins, and others are equally critical of all religions, including (and perhaps especially) Islam. The self-appointed defenders of Christianity only notice when they think they are being "attacked." And the supposed "attacks" on Christianity are things like saying "happy holidays" or Google commemorating the birthday of Cesar Chavez.

I just don't like whiners who declare themselves perpetual victims over the most trivial things, in hopes of getting sympathy.

FloydA:nocturnal001: FloydA: Z-clipped: [stupid troll's name redacted]: FloydA: Can someone translate this from Derp to English for me?

It is easier to (atheistically)troll in white, christian USA, than it would be to do the same in Saudi Arabia.

If the government in the US operated the way southern white evangelicals want it to, atheists who spoke out here would have just as much reason to fear for their lives as the atheists in Muslim dominated countries do.

Seems as though the god-botherers can't even keep their story straight. Salon whining about atheists being Islamophobes.

I don't understand your point.

Some Christians (like the troll whose name I snipped above) claim that the mean old atheists are unfairly "picking on" them and claim that atheists are too scared to say anything bad about Muslims, when in fact Hitchens, Dawkins, and others are equally critical of all religions, including (and perhaps especially) Islam. The self-appointed defenders of Christianity only notice when they think they are being "attacked." And the supposed "attacks" on Christianity are things like saying "happy holidays" or Google commemorating the birthday of Cesar Chavez.

I just don't like whiners who declare themselves perpetual victims over the most trivial things, in hopes of getting sympathy.

Ah ok.

Yes, that is something lost on these guys. If it seems like atheists focus more on Christians it is only because they have the power in the US. For all their pain in the assness I doubt many atheists would trade for muslims.

Lenny_da_Hog:100 Watt Walrus: The My Little Pony Killer: Oh please. Like no religion has ever paid for and put up advertising that insults people of other faiths. They just don't like it when the same game gets played against them instead of to their advantage.

/not gonna walk on eggshells around your delusion

Other people do it, so being an asshole is OK!

In the real world....

"Hey, I think if I throw this hammer up in the air over and over again, it might hit a cloud and cause it to rain!"

"That's stupid."

----

"Hey, if I talk to myself and pretend it's a guy who got killed a couple of thousand years ago and ask him nicely, he'll let me live forever in the clouds!"

"That's stupid"

"Don't disrespect my faith! It's my faith, and now you're bad because you're disrespecting my faith! It's my *faith* and all, you know! Do you know what faith is? It's *faith*, and you have to respect it!...."

And saying, "That's stupid" to the second person, apropos of nothing, is being an asshole. It actually is disrespectful - and without reason at that. So you've helped make my point.

In the case of this billboard, the "That's stupid" is a sucker punch for no justifiable reason. It's being a dick for the sake of being a dick. It doesn't further the case of atheism, nor does it further the cause of those who consider atheism to be a cause (which also seems pretty pointless to this atheist).

If someone is shoving their religion in your face, by all means tear them down. Run rings around them logically. Don't let them wiggle out of answering the questions they don't like to confront. Force them to face the fallacies of their beliefs. I'm all for dissuading a person of their delusions when that person is using their delusions to the detriment of others or is trying to force the world, or even another person, to conform to those delusions.

But doing a drive-by on someone's belief system is pointless and cowardly. If you don't have the stones and the intellect to engage in debate those with whom you disagree, STFU and stop making it harder for people who do have that courage and wherewithal.

It's not difficult to be an atheist without being a dick. In fact, if you're being a dick about it, you're really, really doing it wrong.

Spare the rod and spoil the child! It's my faith! Make the woman faithful to her husband! It's my faith! Go ahead, try to argue anything about that while respecting my faith. You can't talk me out of punishing heretics with commerce or violence, because it's my faith! You have to respect my faith!

Bullshiat. Marginalize people who say stupid things when they say them. Ridicule, not respect. If you bow down to their idols out of respect, you're giving them the message that their idols indeed have magical powers.

Spare the rod and spoil the child! It's my faith! Make the woman faithful to her husband! It's my faith! Go ahead, try to argue anything about that while respecting my faith. You can't talk me out of punishing heretics with commerce or violence, because it's my faith! You have to respect my faith!

Bullshiat. Marginalize people who say stupid things when they say them. Ridicule, not respect. If you bow down to their idols out of respect, you're giving them the message that their idols indeed have magical powers.

Not being a dick ≠ bowing down. And anyone who falls back on a mantra to answer any question that challenges them is someone on whom any effort is wasted. So, again, the billboard is pointless, and ridicule is pointless. They pretty much cannot serve to make anything better, and therefore only serves the smug self-satisfaction of those serving it up.

Now, offering persuasive arguments may not sway anyone clinging to "faith," but they can persuade others who might be open to different kinds of thinking. While on the other hand, being a dick is likely to turn away those otherwise open-minded people.

But if you can find some other, constructive purpose served by ridiculing religion junkies, I'm all ears.

The My Little Pony Killer:Oh please. Like no religion has ever paid for and put up advertising that insults people of other faiths. They just don't like it when the same game gets played against them instead of to their advantage.

/not gonna walk on eggshells around your delusion

You know, I think your a jerk. I dont go and post it all over the place though.

Lionel Mandrake:winterbraid: Aw, are we really going the "debate semantics until all words are meaningless" route, apologists?

I was really looking forward to "cite laughably unscientific 'reasearch' that proves there's a god."

[Ray "Banana Man "Comfort image 280x156]

What more proof do you need, heathen?

If atheists in general really wanted to be @$$holes, we had a golden once-in-a-lifetime opportunity a few years ago, thanks to the @$$hole in Lionel's picture.

The KJV Holy Bible, which many of the more extremist Christian fundie theocrats hold to be the One True Word of God (some even going so far as to place it above the original Hebrew and Greek!), was first published in 1611. There were 400th Anniversary Editions of the KJV on sale in bookstores around the world in 2011.

Remember what Banana Man did a few years prior to that, for the 150th Anniversary of the publication of The Origin of Species? We could've returned the favor in ♠♠♠♠♠. Imagine: Reprinting the full text from the Gütenberg original but with footnotes from the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, 150-page introduction by Hitchens or Dawkins or some such showing the history of the Bible in general and the KJV in particular, and how it was used to justify all manner of atrocities including the Nazi Holocaust as well as U.S. southern slavery of blacks, etc. With a nice dedication right up front: "Sincerely and gratefully dedicated to Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron, for giving us the idea."

Doing precisely this was seriously debated in various forums in 2009−2010 and even into 2011. But, it was not done, mainly because most atheists had no beef with Christians in general, and while Comfort had certainly provoked us mightily, doing such a thing would be insulting and @$$holish not only to Comfort and his ilk, but to all of Christianity, even the many in favor of Separation of Church and State, etc.